tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC October 23, 2013 12:00am-1:01am PDT
good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes, republicans have been scoring a lot of cheap political points on obama care lately because, let's facing it, health care.gov has made it easy to do. when your website doesn't work, you leave yourselves over to attack. but obama care also provides a convenient scapegoat to blame for all sorts of economic ills that either pre-existed or have nothing to do with the health care law. a new jobs report today delayed by the government shutdown, tonight we have facts. one bit of data in particular that might put one of its most insidious lies out of commission. >> you say blame the health care law for the surge in part-time workers? >> welcome to part-time nation. not something we want to be proud of. >> obama care is causing a rise in part-time employment. >> in order to comply with this law, they're putting people on part-time. >> there's been a shift in hiring practices because obama care is coming.
>> you can all see the rise in part-time labor. >> we are becoming something of a part-time employment country. >> fox news. we have also cut back on hiring full-time employees. >> and by republican politicians ad nauseam. >> just when we need a full-time economy, america is becoming a part-time economy. these are the effects of obama care. >> obama care is a big reason we're turning into a nation of part-time workers. >> because of obama care, millions of full-time workers can only find part-time work. >> and we're seeing our economy turn from a full-time job economy to a part-time job economy. >> we do not want a part time working america. >> a part-time economy, part-time opportunities. >> people are being divorced from full-time to part-time work. >> we're becoming part-time america because of this law. >> we're forcing people to go from full-time work to part-time work.
>> it's killing their jobs, it's forcing them into part-time work. >> forced into part-time work. >> for all the people out of a job, all the people in part-time work. >> losing their jobs, being pushed into part time work. >> losing their jobs, forced into part time work. >> but luckily, we don't have to rely on politicians, pundits and anecdotes to tell us what's going on in the economy, we also have data. today we learned that full-time employment is up. and part-time employment is down since last june. and down since last june when obama care wasn't a factor. the economy is moving in the direction opposite -- you see the rise in part-time work starts after the crash and has since gone down. in part, obama care has been the law of the land. that shocked economists like mark zandy who thought we were going to see a rise in part-time work because of obama care.
>> earlier in the year, look at gdp, looking at job creation around that 15 point threshold. it felt like the trend was toward part-time ememployment. >> the president's health care law is not leading to increased part-time work. >> i expected it, i really have. i just haven't seen it. >> the los angeles times today says today's job numbers pushed the law into the popular conservative name that became care has -- government numbers actually shows that the fraction of part time workers in the work force has declined since 2010. and a closer look at the data provides little evidence for the notion that the health law is driving a shift in part time work. get the zombie -- obama care has become the easy scapegoat for people to blame for things that were already happening in the economy. >> how can you say obama care isn't in part to blame for more
part-timers? >> we say -- we look at the data. when we hear anecdotes, we respond to that. but when you look at the agate data, it rather overwhelmingly demonstrates that again, this is a nice talking point, but it's just not accurate. it's part of the confusion campaign that folks are waging. >> joining me now is the democrat from california and congresswoman, now that we have the bls data, do you expect that we won't hear this anymore because the data shows it just isn't true. >> i do think that my republicans colleagues have consistency shown that data doesn't really change their talking points. they're even marketing books that contribute to the confusion around health care reform. >> one of the things i think that's happened with the health care law is something that also happens with the debt and deficit is that people attach it to their economic anxiety about a labor market that's not
functioning very well in the broadest sense. so people feel like the labor market isn't functioning and they are right to feel that way, then they tag obama care has the culprit. >> can you imagine if congress had been functional and we had passed the jobs act, if we didn't shut down the government over the hysteria over government reform. our economy shouldn't be limping along in recovery. it should be a robust recovery and the only reason it isn't is the antics led by republicans. >> congress has not helped things, but one of the things that we're seeing is that the labor market was not really producing great gains for working people even before the financial crisis, there's long-term structural trends in the economy. the financial crisis broke the labor mark and now you hear this anecdotal stuff, oh, i'm going down to part-time. it also i think become easy for employers to point the finger at obama care for stuff they wanted
to do anyway. >> it is important that we correct the deception because just like the problems that are happening with the website, when you look at the state that have embraced health care reform, everybody's having little glitches, but the states that have embraced it are doing very well. and i think it's something that we have to be very strong in combatting so employees should not use this as an excuse to cut down their labor force. >> is there any way to juditsu this around and basically start a conversation about job creation in the budget talks that are coming down the pike? the problem in the labor market is that we have a lot of people out of work. there doesn't seem to be any kind of momentum in congress towards doing anything in the jobs front that isn't essentially repealing obama care. >> one of the things that all of us know has to be dealt with
this time in the budget talks is a sequester. we were told right when that went into effect that that was going to lead to 10s of thousands of jobs lost. maybe my colleagues learned something when the government was shut down. when you shut down the government, things actually stop happening, maybe they learned something about that and so when we go to budget talks this time, dealing with the sequester needs to be at the top of the agenda. >> do you hear from business owners in your -- people being capped under 30 hours so that they don't qualify for the employer mandate which i note won't go into effect for another year. is that something you interact with your constituents about? >> it's primarily from the point of view of confusion, people just being confused because they hear what the republicans put out there in that other network puts out there and it's led to a lot of confusion, so i'll tell
you, one of the things we have done in my district is a telephone town hall, we're doing a town hall to sign people up. there is no reason for some of this confusion, except for the fact that millions of dollars have been put into a very deliberate campaign. >> joining me now, josh barrow, politics analyzers and the co-director for economic and policy research. i was try today to not make this a straw man, so i was looking for the best case argument that obama care was having a negative effect and was pushing people toward part time work. who has been looking at the average hours worked of people down in the wage scale making around $14, a $15 an hour. it's about 20 minutes a week lower than it was before. but that's about the best i
could find. do you think, even if it's not having a macro effect that it might be having an effect on low wage workers? >> i mean someone, somewhere has had their hours cut, that's absolutely true. but my colleague and i looked at the data on the percentage of the workforce that's working less than 30 hours a week and we compared the first six months of 2013 with the first six months of 2012 and it had actually fallen? have you sfound some subgroup -- the idea that this has had noticeable effect, that just doesn't make aniens. >> josh, do you think this talking point is running out of steam as the data comes in i think a year or two years ago, it was a reasonable hypothesis to say -- let's run the experiment, maybe it's going to happen. >> i don't think it was a reasonable high pott cyst.
you have to be working more than 30 hours a week, you probably have to be a pretty low wajs worker because this $2,000 penalty is the reasonable -- if you're a high wage worker, that $2,000 probably doesn't make you want to cut their house. if you look at jed graham's numbers and suggest that maybe you've had about 100 sthourks people who have been pushed down from full-time work to part time work. one out of every 15 workers has had their hours cut. this is a penalty that's not going to be in effect for another 14 months. i think you could see some measurable effects from this. i don't think you're going to see millions of americans pushed out of work. >> one out of 1,500 is a smaller
percentage than the amount of times it has been provoked in the debate. that's crazy. we had our incredible, incredible producers and tape editors who are searching through this today. it's a gold mine because it is said all the time and it's one of these facts that becomes truth or repetition that i have heard back to me in diners, in bars. these are people who said my cousin got his hours cut because of obama care, it is death out there. >> chris, we looked at this because my mother is a big fan of you, and msnbc in general assured me that that was happening because she went down to the movie theater and they were cutting everyone's hours so i arranged to do this with any colleague and it's not showing up in the data. >> it's a rare son that fact checks his mother on national television. >> she'll get me for that. >> so here's the deeper question. i think this worry about
part-time work is a convenient way of focusing people's anxiety about a job market that every month we get jobs numbers that are screaming out policymakers, hello, hello, the job market is broken. >> sure, and the public is not very good at looking at the economy and figuring out -- >> i think you're right the republicans have latched on this this. but there's an opportunity for liberals that -- get employers to take on their responsibility to provide health insurance. >> let me just quickly say, the employer man date, because there're two different manage dates. there's an employer mandate who says we have above 50 employees who have to provide health insurance to your full-time employees. so if you didn't have that penalty you would get a lot of employees dropping health care coverage. you're seeing some of this with part-time workers like trader joe's getting rid of his health care coverage for people who work less than 30,000.
what a lot of those workers are finding is it's cheaper for them to go by exchange coverage. this is effectively a wage -- we might want more employers. >> it has nothing to do with the sanctions because these were employees that were putting in less than 30 hours a week. >> if the law was spob successful -- if gets active and competitive and robust. >> and if we didn't have the sanction on employers for full-time work. that would not be an issue. you might actually see a real increase in wages for those low wage full-time workers. when we're looking for something that -- getting rid of the employer mandate might be good for that other than the fact that it affects the unemployment rate. >> we weren't growing all that fast even if you go back to the
first six months of the year. but we're looking at 170,000 to 180,000, now the last three months we're looking at 140, 150. we're in a hole, we're down nine million jobs. >> josh barrow and dean maker. mr. obama suggested applying for the exchanges the old-fashioned way. >> the phone number for these call centers is 1-800-318-2596. >> what is the state you're calling about. >> maryland. >> we called moments after the president spoke, but there were problems there. >> the president was just on television and he said call this 800 number if you're having problems with the website and i'm calling.
>> trying to sign yourself up for obama care and reporting on your failure to america. someone else tried to do the same thing and had a frustrating but successful experience. and she will be here to tell us about it ahead. [ female announcer ] nice 'n easy. in one step get expert highlights and lowlights. for color they may just think you were born with. [ rob ] i'm a lucky guy. [ female announcer ] with nice 'n easy, get the most natural shade of you. [ unr ass [ female announcer ] e people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk.
i've been trying since day one to get an account and login on health care.gov. i failed again. >> you couldn't make this page work. >> and again. >> it wouldn't log me in. and again. not working. okay so i'm starting all over. that's not a valid answer? the system is unavailable. i'm logging in again. look, it's a sad face. >> if i were signing up for myself, this is where my patients would be exhausted. >> your account couldn't be created at this time. the system is unavailable. >> by now you have probably seen news stories showing a reporter trying and failing to get on to health care.gov. it's like a whole new genre. television reporters who already have benefits aren't the ones who need health care exchanges. >> it's not about you, is it?
>> it's not about me, i have been doing this as a journalistic endeavor. but a lot of people tell me that this isn't working for them. >> what ultimately will make or break obama care is whether those who actually need affordable health care coverage can get it. today we saw an interesting testimonial from one of the people who managed to do so in a surprising place. the website of fox news. fox news link and sally cohn joins me now. tell me about the circumstances in which you, not as a reporter, not as a commentator, a as someone who actually needs health care in the individual
market place went to the exchange to get it. >> crazy that. there's a couple of things that people should know about my story. first of all, i'm in new york and i have the privilege of being in a state where our state government has not tried to sabotage the implementation of obama care. and also, new york has historically had the highest individual insurance market premiums in the country. so there's a lot at stake here. my insurance to put it briefly is really crummy right now. a year ago i was paying $1,600 for me, my partner and my kid. then -- because it was such bad insurance anyway, $3,000 deductible. the out of pockets were in the neighborhood of 10,000. i lowered down to a bronze level if you will and was paying $965 a month. >> which is a lot of money. >> a lot of money with a $7,000 deductible and a $36,000 out of
possibility max for the year. and a $2 million annual cap. which by the way let's -- >> right, exactly. is illegal under the affordable care act. if you got really sick or your partner got really sick -- >> 2 million, come on? >> i'm not going to sugar coat it. it took me a while. it took me a good week of trying. >> they weren't making up that the website didn't work. >> the website stinks. look, if it took a while to get amazon.com working. >> you finally did get through after about a week? >> i finally did get through. my kid like your kid is awake at 7:00 in the morning on a weekend. and so i thought i would try it.
i had gotten through pieces of the process throughout the week. finally i was able to get through, sign up and look at all my plans. and there were 50 plans that were more affordable than my current insurance. i already had one of the most affordable individual insurance plans in new york. now there are 50 better options? >> we have a little full screen of what the sort of the new insurance looks like, the sort of statistics, or the savings, you have a much lower deductible. you have a lower out of pocket match. >> i. >> you're paying #:31 a month. i could have either way, it still would have been a lower dedouble that's funny, i was
tooling around on one of the private oscar websites. i should say that my brother now works there. i was tooling around looking at their comparison plans. i'm not used to the enterprise of doing this kind of comparison shopping. >> first of all, it took a really long time in the first place when i had to pick. it took me on and off about five days, because there was no one place you could go. there were sort of brokered sights. >> you're saying before obama care? >> before obama care it was a mess. the private insurance company compared apples and oranges. even with the website glitches, it took me about four hours total to save over $5,000. come on, that's good money. but, yeah, the actual picking between 50 different insurance plans. part of the reason people aren't showing up is because the websites aren't glitchy. it takes a while to get this stuff figured out.
>> it's not like a hamburger, it's not that simple. >> even with all the server errors, it was more than twice as fast to apply under the affordable care act private exchanges than it was to apply in the old way. and it was also much les confusing and sbrouive. in a new way they didn't ask me anything except whether i smoked. it has gotten dramatically better even though the government should stand to buy some new servers. >> when i did not have employer, which is that you have to answer so many questions under the old unregulated regime. when you talk about surgery, have you ever -- how much are you drinking?
>> i literally spent more time hitting the refresh button and waiting for the servers than i spent answering questions. it just was that simple. coming up -- >> i cannot tell you how many texans across our great state have grabbed me by the shoulder and they said please, i'm afraid for my kids and my grandkids. if we keep bankrupting this country, we're going to loses this -- >> conservatives do best when it comes to talking about this nation's dealt. it turns out, no one is screwing the next generation more than they are. i'll explain ahead.
when you listen to conservatives pushing austerity in order to introduce budget deficits they always tell you it's for the children. >> we're trying to protect our children and our grand children's future and the president just wants to spend money we don't have. >> we have seen unprecedented spending and mounting of debt. >> the senate has passed a budget in four years. that's wrong. we have a fiscal crisis in this country, it's hurting our economy, it's guaranteeing that our children and our grandchildren have a diminished --
>> we are saddling them with debt. but here's the thing, when we take a look at the generation of people who are most affected by the current job market, one that's been hammered by austerity, budget cuts, public sector layoffs and serious fiscal crises, we find that it is young people that are getting crushed. and they are getting crushed right now, not in the future. here's a snapshot of today's job report. for young people between the ages of 20 and 24. the unemployment rate is nearly six points higher than the national average. that's just the half of it. barely more than 20% of 18 to 24-year-olds had a full-time job for all of last year. which is down from nearly 30%. if you look at wages, the median income of households, headed by americans under 25 fell by more than 1.5% last year. talk to any reechblt college graduate or young person and the story is the same. trying to get a job is a brutal exercise in futility.
and it's showing in the data. a record 15% of people between the ages of 16 and 24 are neither in school or working. that's 6 million young people. that is the makings of a lost generation. some of these are actual children of the same number of pundits who are so infat waits with austerity. >> macroeconomic advisors find that the combination of austerity and all the crises emposed by -- shaved almost 1.5 points off of our gdp. although it's sharp cuts to services and investments we would not have lost more than 600,000 public sector jobs. this isn't just a temporary hiccup, in which you can hold your breath and it all goes away. today's young people who are graduating with record student loan debt totalling more than a trillion dollars.
these financial impedestrianments become social impediments, thinking twice about getting married and taking risks. here's the most damaging part of all of this. having the bad luck of graduating into a bad labor market will haunt you for years. one study found that young people who entered the job market during recession not only have lower wages in their first job, but unlucky graduates suffer persistent earning declines lasting ten years which for some can mean a lifetime of reduced overall savings. if you really, sincerely care about children, the most important thing is to get the labor market working. no more government shutdowns, no more induced crises. if you need a high-minded justification to tell your constituents, tell them the truth. tell them you're doing it for the children.
but after one day's use, dishcloths can redeposit millions of germs. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to a fresh sheet of bounty duratowel. look! a fresh sheet of bounty duratowel leaves this surface cleaner than a germy dishcloth, as this black light reveals. it's durable, cloth-like and it's 3 times cleaner. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to bounty duratowel. the durable, cloth-like picker-upper.
so ditch your dishcloth and switch to bounty duratowel. life could be hectic. as a working mom of two young boys angie's list saves me a lot of time. after reading all the reviews i know i'm making the right choice. online or on the phone, we help you hire right the first time. with honest reviews on over 720 local services. keeping up with these two is more than a full time job, and i don't have time for unreliable companies. angie's list definitely saves me time and money. for over 18 years we've helped people take care of the things that matter most. join today.
coming up, we'll test the hypothesis that it's only government that faces no accountability for big-time screw ups by taking a look at everyone's favorite megabank. we begin in missouri where we say thank you to a man with a familiar name. >> look at this pile of littered synthetic drug wrappers we found near the location of one of the raids. this is big business. >> that's chris hayes, an investigative reporter. >> demanded we leave the property, a sign on the front door of one of our stores says it all, no media or reporters. especially chris hastes. >> another thing about chris hayes is that fox 2's chris hayes. he's bombarded on twitter by people who think he's interacting with this show.
i work in st. louis. even to the mean ones like people saying you're an idiot, he's exceptionally patient. when people offer an apology, he's still a gentleman. no apology necessary. i certainly got the better twilter handle. the second awesomest thing on the internet today, when you're running for political office, it's a distinct advantage to have the dugger family campaigning for you. it seemed like a no-brainer when virginia republican candidate for governor had the duggers at a rally last week. until this happened. >> there's such a stark contrast between him and his opponent. >> you just said his opponent. >> the elder dugger's flub prompted a spoof by the channel heavy crude video. >> there's let me -- there's
such a stark contrast between -- i get tongue twisted here. a long day. there's such a stark contrast between -- let me try again. okay, it's such a stark contrast between -- >> and his opponent. okay. okay. >> nailed it. >> with a roll call with all the children starting with a letter j. the third awesomest thing on the internet today, this guy is on a roll. he's a par olympic skier and he has a great sense of humor about himself. >> i got one leg but a smile on hi face. you'd be smiling too if you had my parking space. my leg is cut off way up at the hip.
big complicated institutionses from governments to banks have to take on complicated tasks. the private sector creates the conditions for accomplishments while the public sector -- maybe you've hard of it. >> health care.gov has had some major problems and it's become a test case for conservatives who say when government does big things, it fails because there's no accountability formal fees sans. >> the people who designed the website shouldn't be in charge of our health care. the government is going to botch this. >> i think republicans would argue it's more them mattic than that. it's a sign that big government can do big things. >> very much so. >> health care.gov needs is the displunge and accountability of the private market.
let's test that hypothesis and go north to one of the largest and most successful banks of america, jpmorgan chase. here is jpmorgan chase's rap sheet. june 2010, $48.6 million fine co-mingling bank and client funds in lound. april 2011, $56 million settlement in overraj charges. june 2011, $163.6 million in penalties, from sec charges of misleading investors. july 2011, 228 million dollar settlement of 93 rigged municipal bond transactions in the united states. 900 other instances of the settlements, fines -- credit card fees to -- improper home
foreclosures to yesterday's news. >> jpmorgan in the process of making a huge settlement with the federal government. but criminal charges are still possible. >> at the same time jpp morgan -- ultimately going up. the compensation of the chief executive jamie dimon totaling more than $61 million from 2010 through 2012 alone. and the accolades are more affordable. >> it's a cash generating machine, sure they have had their regulatory issues, but he's looking to settle them. jpmorgan posted a loss because of all the legal expenses, but under jamie dimon, that didn't come from the hand of the market.
that came from journalists and activists holding jpmorgan to account. >> jp morgan chase is nearing a $6 billion settlement to institutional invests. joining me now is ed connor former partner. specializes in consumer finance advisory and investment and alexis goldstein, communications director for the other 98%. al lexis, beginning with you, if you look at the rap sheet, this is just the past three years. what is going on at that bank? is there something special there? is this that they're worse at getting caught than other banks? like what is going on there?
>> i don't think that they're any worse or better than any other banks. jamie dimon and jpmorgan chase is held up as the pinnacle of wall street. jamie dimon is admitting that half a million which is more than half of their net income last year was acquired through criminal means and illegal actions. so if that is what is happening at the best banks on wall street, what is happening at the rest of the banks? how much of the rest of the bank's profits are from illegal activities? >> they're not pleading to criminal activity, they're essentially no -- >> there seems to be more than a little to that. the rap sheet is kind of remarkable. >> i thought that was a mischaracterization there that half their earnings from last year represent fraud lent activity. largely coming from activities
that were carried out before the financial crisis by bear stearns and washington mutual, a lot of it is and remember that jp morgan bought this almost from zero. so they assumed the liability and these are settlements from deeds they went before. >> so the point is that the book was built, the book of business that was jp morgan, was built and they made a lot of money in the run up to the crisis, during the subprime period. my understanding that the d oj -- under, in the midst of the crisis, jpmorgan chase acquired washington mutual. washington mutual did a lot of shady stuff. they assumed that business. can you clarify this for me? this settlement doesn't actually touch the washington mutual stuff? >> i don't know all the details, but i do think it's important to realize that this is probably not different in kind than a lot
of the activity that we have seen in courts a and in settlements today. this is probably different in degree. but let's take a step back. during the crisis, you had some 20% or 30% of housing value in the country decline. which meant that $5 trillion $6 trillion disappears. the rating agent -- everyone has been suing everyone else for five years. and when you have between thing a gags of bear stearns and washington mutual and jpm, very large mortgage originators, if they were problems broadly, which there definitely were, you ought to expect some pretty big numbers. >> we need to make sure that we also take a step back and look at what this settlement come tans. >> i want you to hold that exact thought and continue right after we take this break.
earlier in the show i asked what your prescription for job growth was, we got many answers posted to our twitter and facebook accounts. michael said infrastructure, fix the roads, fix the bridges, fix the power grid. and pamela session how about passing the jobs act. it guides you to a number that will change
i think any time you're looking at the greatest fine in the history of wall street regulation, it's really worth asking, should this guy stay in his job? in any other industry. if he managed the restaurant and got the biggest health -- there's only a little bit of poison in the food. >> i cut you off. you were making a point about the broadest context of this. >> the mashing together of multiple lawsuits and multiple open investigations.
you have to take a step back. if we took out just one lawsuit that this lawsuit covered that sued jpmorgan because of -- and i just wanted to make a point to what ed today earlier which is that some of this is about before the crisis and the thing that washington mutual did or things that bear stearns did. no one on wall street acquires a company without understanding that they take on the liability of the company that they're purchasing. just because washington mutual or bear was the ones -- they went into it with open eyes, they purchased those companies, they were the top bidder. >> in terms of the money, this is an eye popping number, but actually the number on the table was an eye popping number. when we look at all the combined penalties. is this the system working or failing to work?
>> this is going to produce the accountability that makes sure this never happens again or is this a speeding ticket, a slap on the wrist and essentially the cost of business that can be written down? >> i think it's kind of neither. i think this in particular i can't speak to all the other things that have happened throughout the years. but this kind of resolution is still part of the law. painful hangover from the worst period in residential mortgage lending in the history of the world. we have a financial system that was systematically making comical credit decisions for a period of years and that creates real damage to actual people and real pain to actual investors and the notion that it's not going to take a lot of time is farce kl. i think that's what it's about, we have a broken system and this is part of fixing it and the nice things about financial reform that's already been undertaken is this kind of ridiculous outcome actually can't happen again, like a lot
of the bad practices of the past, actually can't be done now. >> alexis, before you voice that disagreement, do you see this as the system working? and how do you understand the fines and penalties in the context of market discipline? it seems to me that the market wasn't actually doing a very good job of holding jpmorgan to account, that it took this kind of regulators in the doj and others to expose this. >> we can hold jpmorgan responsible for all of them. and that affects our growth, employment and our wages. one of those is we had a 30% drop in real estate prices, i don't think you can hold the banks responsible for that. that precip talted a run on the banks. you still would have had a run on the banks which did enormous damage to our economy and then there were pour lending practices as welt. i personally don't think that the poor lending practices really -- and the run on the
banks, but when we hold the banks responsibility for all of that, even if the numbers are low, they will rein in their horns. that sills idle, unused and we get slow growth, unemployment and lousy wages. >> they were inflating the market. went out to homes and communities of color and put downtownies on the heads of black american homeowners to make them take out second leans on home that is owned out right. we aren't making out the banks, we're just going to keep inflating until we actually make these banks manageable. >> so here's my question. when roj said this is in some ways the system working out the
legal accountabilities. what alexis do you think would work if this isn't it? if fines of these kinds are not -- >> the culture of wall vote is if you get screwed, it's your fault because you weren't smart enough. you should have done your home work and you should have paid attention. wall street is sharp. the only thing that's going to change the equation of whether or not this is the cost of doing business and you define greater than the profits i'm going to make is the factor of jail time. until we see people prosecuted and thrown behind bars, i don't think we're going to see anything. >> if you hold the banks responsible for that, they won't rein in their horns. >> the crises of the bank industry is not the worst cause in the world. >> the rachel maddow show starts right now. >> this is an amazing story.
you will think i'm making parts of this story up for effect. this is the actual story and it ends in washington today in a way you're not going to believe. but just trust me, just sit down a moment. this is an amazing story. for a very long time, there was one really annoying down side to buying a new computer. so on the one hand, you're getting a new computer. getting rid of your old clunker, everything's going to work faster. new computers for a very long time always came with that freaking terrible preinstalled virus soft war. mcafee. it was always installed in some 30-day free trial, like they were doing you a favor and you were going to want to pay for it thereafter. it was super annoying, it made your computer run really slow,